Search

Karl H Pang,1 Chloe Hobbis,2 Eleanor J Burleigh,3 Saiful Miah4 1Department of Oncology and Metabolism, Academic Urology Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK; 2Medical School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK; 3Leeds Children Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK; 4Department of Urology, Addenbrookes Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UKCorrespondence: Karl H PangDepartment of Oncology and Metabolism, Academic Urology Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UKEmail karlpang@doctors.org.ukIntroduction: The 2-year UK foundation programme (FP) application is based on a scoring system and final year medical students are ranked and allocated to their preferred choice of region to work and train in based on their scores following graduation. Points are allocated to academic components including publications. We aim to evaluate UK medical students’ perception of the publication component of the application.Methods: A 15-item online survey based on students’ perception of the publication component of the FP application was distributed to final year medical students from all UK medical schools. Opinions were sought via a 5-point Likert scale.Results: A total of 155 final year medical students from 9 medical schools completed the survey (response rate 155/1926, 8.05%). In the survey, 69.7% of students felt under pressure to achieve PubMed-indexed (PMI) publications, 7.1% were not aware that the FP application included points for PMI publications and 72.9% had no publications at the time of application. The main reasons for publishing were for the FP application (81.3% agreed) and to increase competitiveness for future specialty training (85.0% agreed). In contrast, 27.1% agreed that they were motivated to publish due to disseminating knowledge; 22.6% and 25.8% agreed that their medical school did not provide adequate training or opportunities for them to achieve PMI publications, respectively.Conclusion: The majority of students felt under pressure to publish with their primary motivation cited as enhancing their FP application. Overall training and opportunities to publish appear to be inadequate amongst the cohort studied. Medical schools should consider providing academic training and opportunities early to highlight the importance and rationale behind research/audits, minimise pressure and optimise research outputs in preparation for FP application.Keywords: foundation school, foundation programme, medical students, publication pressure, UK postgraduate training

Maral J Rouhani,1 Eleanor J Burleigh,2 Chloe Hobbis,2 Charlotte Dunford,1 Nadir I Osman,3 Christine Gan,1 Norma B Gibbons,1 Hashim U Ahmed,1,4 Saiful Miah1,5 1Department of Urology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Charing Cross Hospital, London, UK; 2Medical School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK; 3Department of Urology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK; 4Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK; 5Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK Background: We aimed to determine UK medical students’ perceptions and attitudes and interest toward medical leadership and clinician managers. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted during the academic year 2015–2016. An online questionnaire was distributed to 2,349 final-year students from 10 UK medical schools. Participants were asked to complete a 5-point Likert scale on their current perceptions, attitudes, and interest toward medical leadership and clinician managers. They were also asked to self-rate their leadership competences set by the Medical Leadership Competency Framework and to rate the quality of management and leadership training they received from their medical school. Results: In total, we received 114 complete responses. Only 7.9% of respondents were in agreement (strongly agree or agree) when asked whether they felt they were well informed about what a managerial position in medicine entails. When asked whether clinicians should influence managerial decisions within a clinical setting, 94.7% of respondents were in agreement with the statement. About 85% of respondents were in agreement that it is important for clinicians to have managerial or leadership responsibilities, with 63.2% of students in agreement that they would have liked more management or leadership training during medical school. Over half the respondents rated their management and leadership training they received during medical school as “very poor” or “poor” (54.4%). Conclusion: Our study suggests that UK medical students have an appetite for management and leadership training and appreciate its importance but feel that the training they are receiving is poor. This suggests that there is a gap between the demand for management and leadership training and the quality of training supplied by UK medical schools. Keywords: medical leadership, clinician managers, medical student, training